DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Demmer v. Grunke, 42 N.W.2d 1.

31 citing documents.

  • Kirsebom v. Connelly 486 N.W.2d 172 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
  • Kirsebom v. Connelly 486 N.W.2d 172 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
    Demmer v. Grunke, 230 Minn. 188, 193 , (citations omitted), quoted in Tschida v. Dorle, 235 Minn. 461, 467-68
  • Kantar v. West End Air Conditioning Co. 144 N.W.2d 592 Minn. 1966
  • Kantar v. West End Air Conditioning Co. 144 N.W.2d 592 Minn. 1966
    In Demmer v. Grunke, 230 Minn. 188, 193 , 42 N. W. (2d) 1, 5 , this court stated: “* * * A statutory violation constituting prima facie evidence of negligence prevails as a controlling evidentiary factor against the violator only so long as there is an absence of evidence tending to show a reasonable ground for such violation or only so long as there i
  • Krafft v. Hirt 110 N.W.2d 14 Minn. 1961
  • Krafft v. Hirt 110 N.W.2d 14 Minn. 1961
    The effect of a violation of the Highway Traffic Regulation Act is well stated in Demmer v. Grunke, 230 Minn. 188, 193 , 42 N. W. (2d) 1 , 5: “* * * A statutory violation constituting prima facie evidence of negligence prevails as a controlling evidentiary factor against the violator only so long as there is an absence of evidence tending to show a reasonable ground for such violation or only so long as there is no actual evidenc
  • Pelzer v. Lange 93 N.W.2d 666 Minn. 1958
  • Pelzer v. Lange 93 N.W.2d 666 Minn. 1958
    Demmer v. Grunke, 230 Minn. 188 , 42 N. W. (2d) 1 ; Warning v. Kanabec County Co-op.
  • Norby v. Klukow 81 N.W.2d 776 Minn. 1957
  • Norby v. Klukow 81 N.W.2d 776 Minn. 1957
    5 Steinke v. Indianhead Truck Line, Inc. supra; Demmer v. Grunke, 230 Minn. 188 , 42 N. W. (2d) 1 .
  • Borris v. Cox 73 N.W.2d 372 Minn. 1955
  • Borris v. Cox 73 N.W.2d 372 Minn. 1955
    The rule which appears to govern the present situation is stated in Demmer v. Grunke, 230 Minn. 188, 193 , 42 N. W. (2d) 1, 5 , as follows: “* * * A statutory violation constituting prima facie evidence of negligence prevails as a controlling evidentiary factor against the violator only so long as there is an absence of evidence tending to show a reasonable ground for such violation or only so long as there is no ac
  • Kolatz v. Kelly 69 N.W.2d 649 Minn. 1955
  • Kolatz v. Kelly 69 N.W.2d 649 Minn. 1955
    Norling v. Stempf, 208 Minn. 143 , ; Jeddeloh v. Hockenhull, 219 Minn. 541, 545 , 18 N. W. (2d) 582, 585 ; Demmer v. Grunke, 230 Minn. 188, 194-195 , 42 N. W. (2d) 1, 6 ; Bosell v. Rannestad, 226 Minn. 413, 421 , 33 N. W. (2d) 40, 45 ; Kraus v. Saffert, 208 Minn. 220, 225 , ; see, Johnston v. Jordan, 193 Minn. 298, 300 , .
  • Stedman v. Norlin 68 N.W.2d 393 Minn. 1955
  • Stedman v. Norlin 68 N.W.2d 393 Minn. 1955
    Knudson v. Nagel, 238 Minn. 186 , 56 N. W. (2d) 420 ; Olson v. Olson, 238 Minn. 102 , 55 N. W. (2d) 706 ; Demmer v. Grunke, 230 Minn. 188 , 42 N. W. (2d) 1 .
  • Leman v. Standard Oil Co. 57 N.W.2d 814 Minn. 1953
  • Leman v. Standard Oil Co. 57 N.W.2d 814 Minn. 1953
    The rule is well expressed in Demmer v. Grunke, 230 Minn. 188, 193 , 42 N. W. (2d) 1, 5 , as follows: * * A statutory violation constituting prima facie evidence of negligence prevails as a controlling evidentiary factor against the violator only so long as there is an absence of evidence tending *388 to show a reasonable ground for such violation or only so long as there is no
  • Knudson v. Nagel 56 N.W.2d 420 Minn. 1952
  • Knudson v. Nagel 56 N.W.2d 420 Minn. 1952
    Demmer v. Grunke, 230 Minn. 188 , 42 N. W. (2d) 1 ; Olson v. Olson, 238 Minn. 102 , 55 N. W. (2d) 706 .
  • Olson v. Olson 55 N.W.2d 706 Minn. 1952
  • Olson v. Olson 55 N.W.2d 706 Minn. 1952
    The effect of the operation of such a statute is stated in Demmer v. Grunke, 230 Minn. 188, 193 , 42 N. W. (2d) 1, 5 , as follows: “* * * A statutory violation constituting prima facie evidence of negligence prevails as a controlling evidentiary factor against the violator only so long as there is an absence of evidence tending to show a reasonable ground for such violation * * *.
  • Steinke v. Indianhead Truck Line, Inc. 54 N.W.2d 777 Minn. 1952
  • Steinke v. Indianhead Truck Line, Inc. 54 N.W.2d 777 Minn. 1952
    Our attention has been directed to Demmer v. Grunke, 230 Minn. 188 , 42 N. W. (2d) 1 , wherein we applied the rule that due care in keeping a lookout for other approaching vehicles is not to be determined by the number of times the operator of a bicycle or other vehicle looked or by how often, or when, or from where.
  • Brodd v. Priem 52 N.W.2d 429 Minn. 1952
  • Brodd v. Priem 52 N.W.2d 429 Minn. 1952
    Demmer v. Grunke, 230 Minn. 188 , 42 N. W. (2d) 1 ; Hubred v. Wagner, 217 Minn. 129 , 14 N. W. (2d) 115 .
  • Tschida v. Dorle 51 N.W.2d 561 Minn. 1952
  • Tschida v. Dorle 51 N.W.2d 561 Minn. 1952
    The effect of the operation of such a statute is stated in Demmer v. Grunke, 230 Minn. 188, 193 , 42 N. W. (2d) 1, 5 , as follows: “* * * A statutory violation constituting prima facie evidence of negligence prevails as a controlling evidentiary factor against the violator only so long as there is an absence of evidence tending to show a reasonable ground for such violation or only so long as there is no ac
  • Warning v. KANABEC COUNTY CO-OPERATIVE OIL ASSN. 42 N.W.2d 881 Minn. 1950
  • Seitzer v. Halverson 42 N.W.2d 635 Minn. 1950
  • Seitzer v. Halverson 42 N.W.2d 635 Minn. 1950
    Paul, 201 Minn. 276 , ; Demmer v. Grunke, 230 Minn. 188 , 42 N. W. (2d) 1 .